Path: utzoo!utgpu!utstat!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!csd4.milw.wisc.edu!lll-winken!uunet!mcvax!hp4nl!uva!mel!hm
From: hm@uva.UUCP (HansM)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.wizards
Subject: Re: getcwd() and friends.
Message-ID: <687@uva.UUCP>
Date: 6 Apr 89 17:36:56 GMT
References: <3675@ficc.uu.net] <8136@chinet.chi.il.us>
Sender: news@uva.UUCP
Reply-To: hm@uva.UUCP (Hans Mulder)
Organization: Faculteit Wiskunde & Informatica, Universiteit van Amsterdam
Lines: 19

In article <8136@chinet.chi.il.us] les@chinet.chi.il.us (Leslie Mikesell) writes:
]Better yet would be a per-process *name* of the current working
]directory stored somewhere, built according the the way you
]happened to get there.  This would make getcwd() amount to printing
]static data instead of the contortions it does now,

Sure.

]                                                    and as a
]side effect, it would make ".." mean something unsuprising in the
]presence of linked directories.
]
]Les Mikesell

I am afraid that a symlink pointing to "../foo" would do very surprising
things if the meaning of ".." were decided on a per-process basis....


Hans Mulder	hm@uva.uucp	mcvax!uva!hm